Global Village :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For good-natured and mutually-respectful discussions of politics and current affairs. Soap-boxing and the promotion of extremist causes motivated by hate will not be tolerated by our moderators. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
adequatedane Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Will it be science which solves the problem?
>
> Ask yourself does government control science or
> science control government?

In some instances govm't seems to be in control. But it can be argued that science drives govm't. Science will solve the food, water, and resource shortages. ie; advancements in farming, desalination, constructing high rise homes, mass transportation, etc. However, as long as govm't protects the petroleum industry, advancement in alternative fuels will not develope and we will have a future fuel problem until the strong arm of the richest industry in the world is broken. Which comes down to the wealthy petroleum investors giving up their castles.

> discovery of Evolution of fertility rates means this...
> evolution defined as..."the gradual development of
> something, especially from a simple to a more
> complex form."
>
> Fertility rate is defined as..."The number of
> children who would be born per woman (or per 1,000
> women) if she/they were to pass through the
> childbearing years bearing children according to a
> current schedule of age-specific fertility
> rates."

You could have just explained it in your own words. I don't see how "evolution" applies to the birth rate. Impregnation has evolved thanks to medical advancements.

> Some believe the declining trend in the "evolution
> of fertility rate" to the current 2.5 per woman
> slows but doesn't stop the upward trend in
> population growth.
>
> In the USA for example the fertility rate has
> evolved to 1.76 which is below the replacement
> rate of 2.1.
>
> Now this raises a lot of problems and questions.
>
> For example if this decline continues should the
> U.S. government reduce abortions to increase a
> declining fertility rate?

Sorry to break this to you, but the govm't will never be able to reduce abortions. They will never control the woman's decision to that degree. Now if they increase contraception availability, then yes abortions will lower. The decrease in family size is solely a result of finances. Couples can no longer afford for mom to stay home with the kids which means less kids. She has to work and so cannot have as many kids. And even if dad has a high enough income to support a family, women are deciding to have careers to pursue their own purpose in life which is fast becoming a purpose outside of the home.

> Which raises the question can the U.S. government
> take this action without one or both parties
> suffering defeats in elections if they support
> this action?

Nope, I don't think so.

> Which circles around to the question is our
> present forms of government or ideas of governing
> adequate to meet possible or probable futures?

The govm't is inadequate simply because it is male dominated. When there is an equal number of women in govm't, there will be changes. Only then will the govm't be able to address the problems.

BUT whatever point you're trying to address is lost in confusion. You talk of overpopulation depleting the resources necessary to sustain the numbers, but then cite a decline in birth rate. If no one procreated from this day forward the population would decrease. So I guess you're asking how is birth controlled so as not to exceed our CURRENT resource production. You are presuming our current methods of production (food etc) will remain as is and the population will increase thereby creating a problem. But our methods of production have never been stagnant. Basic ex: we needed steel in the industrial age and science complied. Science gave us steel, then made it stronger and easier to produce.

You underestimate our production capability. And you assume the balance of govm't power will remain on the male side.

He who knows all the answers has not been asked all the questions - Confucius

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
A Future Question 833 adequatedane 06-Feb-19 00:57
Re: A Future Question 129 drrayeye 06-Feb-19 13:04
Re: A Future Question 132 adequatedane 06-Feb-19 21:49
Re: A Future Question 120 WhoWeird 06-Feb-19 23:04
Re: A Future Question 191 adequatedane 06-Feb-19 23:52
Ask a real question, and . . . 114 drrayeye 12-Feb-19 04:00
Alternatively 125 PB Bytes 12-Feb-19 19:53
Re: Alternatively 111 Warwick 12-Feb-19 23:13
Re: Alternatively 103 adequatedane 12-Feb-19 23:15
Re: Alternatively 107 PB Bytes 12-Feb-19 23:20
Re: Alternatively 119 Aine 12-Feb-19 23:34
Re: Alternatively 104 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 12:26
Answering the Question for USA Only 112 Race Jackson 12-Feb-19 23:59
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 127 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 00:06
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 107 Aine 13-Feb-19 00:20
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 111 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 00:28
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 116 Race Jackson 13-Feb-19 16:25
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 98 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 16:30
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 98 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 16:39
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 111 Aine 13-Feb-19 00:11
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 102 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 00:16
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 115 Aine 13-Feb-19 00:22
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 109 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 01:54
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 129 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 01:55
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 103 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 02:18
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 116 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 02:33
Woah!!! 109 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 02:42
Re: Woah!!! 108 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 02:48
Re: Woah!!! 108 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 02:52
Re: Woah!!! 104 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 02:58
Re: Woah!!! 105 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 03:04
Re: Woah!!! 134 Brian Patterson 13-Feb-19 03:16
Re: Woah!!! 101 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 03:27
A suggestion 115 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 03:42
Re: A suggestion 122 Brian Patterson 13-Feb-19 04:10
Re: A suggestion 98 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 04:14
I knew this was going to happen Brian... 110 Racho 13-Feb-19 08:49
Re: I knew this was going to happen Brian... 104 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 11:31
Re: I knew this was going to happen Brian... 113 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 14:40
Re: I knew this was going to happen Brian... 108 Racho 13-Feb-19 17:12
Re: I knew this was going to happen Brian... 129 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 17:31
Re: I knew this was going to happen Brian... 100 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 17:41
Re: I knew this was going to happen Brian... 105 Aine 13-Feb-19 18:57
Re: Woah!!! 109 Audrey 13-Feb-19 04:06
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 97 Race Jackson 13-Feb-19 16:35
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 98 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 17:05
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 111 Aine 13-Feb-19 19:23
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 105 Race Jackson 13-Feb-19 23:09
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 91 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 23:13
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 97 Race Jackson 14-Feb-19 23:00
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 108 Aine 14-Feb-19 16:52
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 97 PB Bytes 14-Feb-19 17:17
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 110 Aine 14-Feb-19 18:32
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 111 PB Bytes 14-Feb-19 18:34
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 110 Aine 14-Feb-19 19:06
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 102 PB Bytes 14-Feb-19 19:23
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 75 Aine 14-Feb-19 22:10
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 93 PB Bytes 14-Feb-19 22:41
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 88 WhoWeird 14-Feb-19 20:57
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 96 Aine 14-Feb-19 22:11
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 93 WhoWeird 14-Feb-19 22:53
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 94 Aine 14-Feb-19 23:25
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 176 WhoWeird 14-Feb-19 23:43
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 102 Audrey 14-Feb-19 20:03
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 94 PB Bytes 14-Feb-19 22:44
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 99 Aine 14-Feb-19 23:18
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 99 Race Jackson 14-Feb-19 22:56
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 86 Aine 14-Feb-19 23:22
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 98 PB Bytes 16-Feb-19 17:05
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 104 Race Jackson 13-Feb-19 16:38
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 103 Aine 13-Feb-19 18:40
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 106 Race Jackson 13-Feb-19 16:31
Re: Answering the Question for USA Only 100 Aine 13-Feb-19 18:36
Re: A Future Question 114 Brian Patterson 13-Feb-19 04:21
Re: A Future Question 106 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 04:35
Re: A Future Question 104 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 04:53
Re: A Future Question 121 Brian Patterson 13-Feb-19 05:27
Re: A Future Question 105 Audrey 13-Feb-19 04:50
Re: A Future Question 104 adequatedane 13-Feb-19 15:42
Re: A Future Question 108 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 15:55
Re: A Future Question 106 adequatedane 13-Feb-19 18:58
Re: A Future Question 90 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 19:03
Re: A Future Question 114 Aine 13-Feb-19 19:06
Re: A Future Question 93 WhoWeird 13-Feb-19 19:08
Re: A Future Question 97 PB Bytes 13-Feb-19 19:59
Robots, AI, and Workflow Automation, Oh My! 111 Race Jackson 13-Feb-19 23:16
Re: A Future Question 114 Audrey 13-Feb-19 22:55
Re: A Future Question 103 adequatedane 14-Feb-19 15:29
Re: Another Question 139 adequatedane 16-Feb-19 17:45


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.